In a unique case, a trial court refused to grant interim maintenance to a 36-year-old woman from Tardeo after discovering that she earned Rs 4 lakh more annually than her estranged husband. The sessions court upheld this ruling, denying the woman’s request for financial support.
The court observed that, while an earning wife can still claim maintenance, the specific circumstances of each case must be considered. Judge C V Patil stated, “Indeed, an earning wife is entitled to maintenance, but other factors need to be taken into account. In this case, the wife earns more than the husband. Therefore, at this stage, the magistrate’s order is legal and proper.”
The woman had filed a domestic violence case against her husband and in-laws in 2021, alleging that she was forced to leave their Dadar home after the birth of their child. Despite this, the court found that her higher income disqualified her from receiving maintenance from her husband.
However, the judge did direct the husband to pay Rs 10,000 per month for the upkeep of their child. Despite the husband’s denial of paternity, citing sexual dysfunction, the court referred to Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act. The act presumes that a child born while the couple was living together is legitimate unless proven otherwise.
The woman had argued in court that she was living with her husband when she conceived and that he had not informed her about his sexual health issues. Once her husband and his family learned about the pregnancy, they began to question her character.
Judge Patil further explained, “The wife conceived while cohabiting with the husband. There is no suggestion that the husband did not have access to her during this period. Therefore, under Section 112 of the Evidence Act, it is presumed at this stage that the child is legitimate.”
Following the magistrate’s decision in November 2022, both parties appealed the ruling. The wife sought personal maintenance and an increase in child support, while the husband continued to deny paternity. Despite the husband’s claims, the court upheld the maintenance order for the child and denied the wife’s request for personal maintenance.
Case Title: Tardeo Woman vs Estranged Husband (2021)
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
